UNIT 1 INTERPRETING ANCIENT INDIA: SURVEY OF SOURCES
Introduction
In the case of ancient India, there are various forms of literary evidence. However, the Rajatarangini
(history of the kings of Kashmir) wri en by Kalhana in the twel h century is considered as the
historical text which records proper historical chronicle da ng from the ancient period of Indian
history. Modern research in the history of ancient 2 India began only in the second half of the
eighteenth century. This scholarly ac vity of construc ng and wri ng history came to be known as
historiography. We shall now a empt to briefly study the dominant historical trends from mid-
eighteenth century onwards.
Historical Trends
In the eighteenth century, the growing administra ve responsibility of the East India Company
necessitated its officers to be familiar with the laws, habits, customs and history of the Indian
people; in other words to know systema cally about the country they were to rule. The ini al efforts
in this direc on resulted in the establishment in Calcu a in 1784 of the Asia c Society of Bengal.
The Orientalists or Indologists
A er the establishment of the East India Company, contemporary history wri ng began. The wri ngs
of European scholars known as Orientalists or Indologists predominated in the 18th and 19th
centuries. Sir was the most significant of them. William Jones, an East India Company official who
promoted Indology. Sir William Jones (1746-94) and Charles Wilkins were both fascinated by Indian
literature and culture. F. Max Mueller (1823-1902), a German-born scholar who never visited India
and spent most of his life in England, gave the greatest push to Indological research. He proposed the
concept of a shared IndoEuropean homeland and heritage. Numerous early orientalists, including
Max Mueller, were outspoken about the unchanging Indian village socie es. They portrayed India as
a country of thinkers while yet believing that the Indian intellect was incapable of poli cal and
material contempla on. They claimed that the ancient Indians were illiterate and accustomed to
dictatorial rule. The Western scholars emphasised that Indians had no concept of na onhood or self-
government.
Charles Grant and the Utilitarians
The Chris an missionaries led by Charles Grant and the U litarians like James Mill did not share the
early orientalist view of India, were hos le to Indian culture in their wri ngs and are said to have
created “Indophobia” by describing Indians as barbaric, irra onal and having no concern for poli cal
values. They described Indian society as unprogressive and stagnant.
The British-Administrator Historians
Vincent A Smith was the best known of the Bri sh-Administrator historians. He made a systema c
survey of early Indian history. Smith believed that India had a long tradi on of oppressive despots
and exaggerated the ruthlessness of ancient Indian kings. He described Kau lya’s penal code as
‘ferociously severe’. Thus the Bri sh scholars had different percep ons of early India. They wrote
with a view to jus fy colonial rule and the exploita on of its Indian resources thus distor ng
historical evidence in the process.
, The Indian Scholars
Indian scholars, influenced by India's reformist leaders as well as growing na onalism and poli cal
awakening, presented a serious challenge to Bri sh views. They began to reconstruct ancient Indian
history so that they recommended social reforms and self-government. Notable among them were
R.L. Miter, R.G. Bhandarkar, S.K. Iyenger, K.A.N. Sastri, K.P. Jaiswal, R.C. Majumdar, V.K. Rajwade and
P.V. Kane etc. These scholars promoted Hinduism under the influence of social reformers who argued
that Hinduism encompassed all religions. The reformists preached that the revival of Hinduism was
essen al for the growth of India as a na on. But scholars have not appreciated the fact that
Hinduism was, at best, an umbrella term for the various Indian religious ideas, beliefs and prac ces
spread across the Indian subcon nent.
Ques ons concerning the Aryan race also captured the imagina on of na onalist leaders and
historians. Although early Orientalists made connec ons between Sanskrit and certain European
languages, Indian scholars now considered India to be the cradle of the Indo-Aryans, one of the
earliest human civiliza ons. Because of this, they rejected the an quity of Indian culture. However,
the discovery of the Harappan civiliza on proved to be a challenge to the claims of such scholars,
but R.L. Miter, R.G. Bhandarkar and V.K. Rajvade generally had a ra onal a tude towards the past.
They were basically social reformers and in this background of reforms and the study of ancient
Indian texts they made an important contribu on to the reconstruc on of the early poli cal and
religious history of India. For example, Bhandarkar supported widow remarriage and condemned
the caste system and the evil of child marriage. Rajwade's Marathi study of the development of the
ins tu on of marriage in is a classic treatment of the subject.
But the Indian historians who ini ally inspired the ideas of social reforms gradually became an -
imperialists. The surge of change in the Indian poli cal scene a er the par on of Bengal in 1905
and the resurgence of militant na onalism le its mark in the annals of history. The gradual change
in historical wri ng was seen partly as a reac on to imperialist views of India's past and partly as an
effort to build na onal pres ge. Hindu culture was considered the predecessor of other Asian
cultures. The ancient period of Indian history was thus celebrated as a period of social peace,
harmony and prosperity. The age of the Guptas was considered the "Golden Year " of ancient India.
Na onalist historians also began to a ribute the highest achievements of poli cal thought and
prac ce to the ancient Hindus. The discovery of Kau lya's Arthashastra and its subsequent
publica on in 1909 led to a comparison between Bismarck's social legisla on and Kau lya's socio-
economic policies. Ancient Indian tribal oligarchies were equated with Athenian democracy. Parallels
have also been drawn between the Bri sh cons tu onal monarchy and the Kau lyan kingdom. All
these wri ngs showed that the tradi on of democra c administra on was well rooted in the Indian
poli cal system. These wri ngs sharpened the edge of the freedom struggle. They emphasized the
ancient period as a glorious period, ignoring past inequali es and restric ons, and promoted the
Indian struggle against the Bri sh, thus providing an ideological weapon for the freedom movement.
Na onal historians, the most important of which is K.P. Jaiswal respected Ancient India on the one
hand, but on the other their approach to the study of early Indian history and culture was as
ahistorical as that of the Bri sh historians. They based their knowledge on single posi ve references
from ancient texts and generalized throughout an quity. They ignored the changing nature of Indian
society. In some ways their wri ngs seem to have been influenced by the revivalist ideas of
Vivekanand, Dayanand and others. Hindu revival also meant accep ng Mill's periodiza on of Indian
history, which was based on the false assump on that ancient India , according to na onalist
historians, meant the glorifica on of what they believed to be Hindu India. But these wri ngs
Introduction
In the case of ancient India, there are various forms of literary evidence. However, the Rajatarangini
(history of the kings of Kashmir) wri en by Kalhana in the twel h century is considered as the
historical text which records proper historical chronicle da ng from the ancient period of Indian
history. Modern research in the history of ancient 2 India began only in the second half of the
eighteenth century. This scholarly ac vity of construc ng and wri ng history came to be known as
historiography. We shall now a empt to briefly study the dominant historical trends from mid-
eighteenth century onwards.
Historical Trends
In the eighteenth century, the growing administra ve responsibility of the East India Company
necessitated its officers to be familiar with the laws, habits, customs and history of the Indian
people; in other words to know systema cally about the country they were to rule. The ini al efforts
in this direc on resulted in the establishment in Calcu a in 1784 of the Asia c Society of Bengal.
The Orientalists or Indologists
A er the establishment of the East India Company, contemporary history wri ng began. The wri ngs
of European scholars known as Orientalists or Indologists predominated in the 18th and 19th
centuries. Sir was the most significant of them. William Jones, an East India Company official who
promoted Indology. Sir William Jones (1746-94) and Charles Wilkins were both fascinated by Indian
literature and culture. F. Max Mueller (1823-1902), a German-born scholar who never visited India
and spent most of his life in England, gave the greatest push to Indological research. He proposed the
concept of a shared IndoEuropean homeland and heritage. Numerous early orientalists, including
Max Mueller, were outspoken about the unchanging Indian village socie es. They portrayed India as
a country of thinkers while yet believing that the Indian intellect was incapable of poli cal and
material contempla on. They claimed that the ancient Indians were illiterate and accustomed to
dictatorial rule. The Western scholars emphasised that Indians had no concept of na onhood or self-
government.
Charles Grant and the Utilitarians
The Chris an missionaries led by Charles Grant and the U litarians like James Mill did not share the
early orientalist view of India, were hos le to Indian culture in their wri ngs and are said to have
created “Indophobia” by describing Indians as barbaric, irra onal and having no concern for poli cal
values. They described Indian society as unprogressive and stagnant.
The British-Administrator Historians
Vincent A Smith was the best known of the Bri sh-Administrator historians. He made a systema c
survey of early Indian history. Smith believed that India had a long tradi on of oppressive despots
and exaggerated the ruthlessness of ancient Indian kings. He described Kau lya’s penal code as
‘ferociously severe’. Thus the Bri sh scholars had different percep ons of early India. They wrote
with a view to jus fy colonial rule and the exploita on of its Indian resources thus distor ng
historical evidence in the process.
, The Indian Scholars
Indian scholars, influenced by India's reformist leaders as well as growing na onalism and poli cal
awakening, presented a serious challenge to Bri sh views. They began to reconstruct ancient Indian
history so that they recommended social reforms and self-government. Notable among them were
R.L. Miter, R.G. Bhandarkar, S.K. Iyenger, K.A.N. Sastri, K.P. Jaiswal, R.C. Majumdar, V.K. Rajwade and
P.V. Kane etc. These scholars promoted Hinduism under the influence of social reformers who argued
that Hinduism encompassed all religions. The reformists preached that the revival of Hinduism was
essen al for the growth of India as a na on. But scholars have not appreciated the fact that
Hinduism was, at best, an umbrella term for the various Indian religious ideas, beliefs and prac ces
spread across the Indian subcon nent.
Ques ons concerning the Aryan race also captured the imagina on of na onalist leaders and
historians. Although early Orientalists made connec ons between Sanskrit and certain European
languages, Indian scholars now considered India to be the cradle of the Indo-Aryans, one of the
earliest human civiliza ons. Because of this, they rejected the an quity of Indian culture. However,
the discovery of the Harappan civiliza on proved to be a challenge to the claims of such scholars,
but R.L. Miter, R.G. Bhandarkar and V.K. Rajvade generally had a ra onal a tude towards the past.
They were basically social reformers and in this background of reforms and the study of ancient
Indian texts they made an important contribu on to the reconstruc on of the early poli cal and
religious history of India. For example, Bhandarkar supported widow remarriage and condemned
the caste system and the evil of child marriage. Rajwade's Marathi study of the development of the
ins tu on of marriage in is a classic treatment of the subject.
But the Indian historians who ini ally inspired the ideas of social reforms gradually became an -
imperialists. The surge of change in the Indian poli cal scene a er the par on of Bengal in 1905
and the resurgence of militant na onalism le its mark in the annals of history. The gradual change
in historical wri ng was seen partly as a reac on to imperialist views of India's past and partly as an
effort to build na onal pres ge. Hindu culture was considered the predecessor of other Asian
cultures. The ancient period of Indian history was thus celebrated as a period of social peace,
harmony and prosperity. The age of the Guptas was considered the "Golden Year " of ancient India.
Na onalist historians also began to a ribute the highest achievements of poli cal thought and
prac ce to the ancient Hindus. The discovery of Kau lya's Arthashastra and its subsequent
publica on in 1909 led to a comparison between Bismarck's social legisla on and Kau lya's socio-
economic policies. Ancient Indian tribal oligarchies were equated with Athenian democracy. Parallels
have also been drawn between the Bri sh cons tu onal monarchy and the Kau lyan kingdom. All
these wri ngs showed that the tradi on of democra c administra on was well rooted in the Indian
poli cal system. These wri ngs sharpened the edge of the freedom struggle. They emphasized the
ancient period as a glorious period, ignoring past inequali es and restric ons, and promoted the
Indian struggle against the Bri sh, thus providing an ideological weapon for the freedom movement.
Na onal historians, the most important of which is K.P. Jaiswal respected Ancient India on the one
hand, but on the other their approach to the study of early Indian history and culture was as
ahistorical as that of the Bri sh historians. They based their knowledge on single posi ve references
from ancient texts and generalized throughout an quity. They ignored the changing nature of Indian
society. In some ways their wri ngs seem to have been influenced by the revivalist ideas of
Vivekanand, Dayanand and others. Hindu revival also meant accep ng Mill's periodiza on of Indian
history, which was based on the false assump on that ancient India , according to na onalist
historians, meant the glorifica on of what they believed to be Hindu India. But these wri ngs
